If you want BS or Political Correctness you have come to the wrong place.

FAQ How can you be an atheist Jew?

An atheist is one who disbelieves in (or denies) the existence of God, Gods, and other supernatural beings.
A Jew is any person whose mother was a Jew, or any person who has gone through the formal process of conversion to Judaism.

May 14, 2006

A HUGE KNOCK AGAINST AMERICAN ATHEISTS

As my readers know, I feel American Atheists and their No God Blog has an overwhelming anti-Israel bias there. Now I have found out that their Atheist of the month for August of 2002 was none other than Holocaust denying white supremacist ass licking piece of shit Larry Darby.Here is a picture of American Atheist President Ellen Johnson putting her hand affectionately on the piece of crap at an Atheists meeting:

Apparently, Darby was the Alabama state director for the American Atheists.

Larry Darby is now running as the Democratic candidate for Alabama Attorney General. He won't win because he is an Atheist. Other than that, his Jew hating, anti-gay, pro-White views would probably give him a slam dunk victory in inbreed country. According to the article in Newsday, he thinks 140,000 Jews died in Europe tops, and most of them died of Typhus.He is off to New Jersey to meet with National Vanguard, a racist hate organization who whores with anyone who hates Jews, blacks, etc, even anti-Christians like Darby. The average IQ of National Vanguard's members is probably very close to the 73 average IQ of Qatar.

Here is a quote by the pond scum Darby via Hammer of Truth, "In my investigations of modern mythology, such as the Six Millions Lie, which by the way was first trotted out by Zionists during or immediately after World War One, there is a nasty aspect that is too often ignored - that of Jewish Supremacism. I’ve noticed megalomania or superiority complexes even with so-called secular Jews. Even though so-called secular Jews reject the existence of YHWH (the Jewish God of War, the surviving god of all the gods Jews once worshiped) who made them the Master Race, according to the Tanakh, so-called secular Jews are still Jewish Supremacists."

Screw Darby, and screw American Atheists for not writing a single bad word about their former Atheist of the Month.

Here are a bunch of quotes by this vile piece of human feces. He even complained in February that American Atheists was too suportive of Israel. Meanwhile, like many Jew haters, he has something against bashing Muslims over bashing Jews. People like Darby are the sickest people on this planet. If I saw him tomorrow I would kick him in the balls.

UPDATE: Biblioblography has pointed out to me that American Atheists posted something about Darby in a newsletter dated August 2005: "We wish to confirm and underscore this fact. Darby has not served in that capacity as a Director for over two years. Many of his activities and statements, especially concerning the Holocaust as well as how he conducts himself regarding Atheist, Freethought, Humanist or nonbeliever groups and individuals, do not in any way reflect the official position of American Atheists or its officers."

I'll still add that I did feel that many of the blog commenters were anti-Israel, and a few of them are definitely anti-semites. I wasn't impressed by others support of these posters either.

And look at that group, hell, they look like they could not organize a trip to the bathroom. And who is "dread-lock" rasta in the fore-ground. This whole scenanario looks like a home-made bullshit movie. It is nothing important.

I have often wondered why the atheist/skeptic community tends toward the left. I often feel like the only conservative skeptic in the world. Since Israel-bashing is primarily a favored activity of the left, this information does not surprise me. The secular humanism that atheists generally subscribe to *should* dictate a stance against terrorism and a stance that is pro-democracy and human rights.

Roya, those on the far left are associated with being for the perceived underdogs. They also tend not to be able to recognize the severity of the threat of terrorists and terrorist mentality.I've said it before, I'm left when it comes to issues like abortion, gay rights, civil rights, etc. But I'm on the right on the war on terror, and I lean to the right when it comes to things like the death penalty and immigration. This kind of makes me a centrist I guess, as I'm all over the map, yet I have very good reasons, I believe, for every one of my stances.

That Larry Darby has the chutzpah to do and say the things that he does is one thing. That American Atheists have given him a stage upon which he can give his orations is quite another thing. Let us not absolve the organization completely of any wrongdoing when it clearly chose him as Atheist of the Month in August 2002 knowing fully well what he was all about.

Great points Lya. I was merely trying to convince Bacon that his positions on anti-semitism and his anti-Arab comments are hypocritical (and yes, I know Arabs are considered semites). I had a lot of hope that you were different from Bacon, Lya, but I guess I was wrong.

They have a saying among police departments, you know, it goes "loyalty above all else, except honor." I guess that can't be applied to Israel, eh?

Thanks Lya for getting rid of Jihad Steve. I owe you. His stupidity/ignorance was draining me.Next time you respond to him you might want to ask him why he sent a letter to his congressman regarding the Palestinians but hasn't written a word in his blog about the Darfur situation.

BEAJ thanks for exposing this guy for what he is. Obviously his ability to use reason comes to a dead end when it comes to Jews. I had to quit several yahoo groups because of the hateful antisemitic comments that were posted there. Its stunning to see how widespread that garbage still is. As far as this Steve guy goes- it is not hypocritical to despise those who would deny others their right to think, live and even, yes choose to believe or not. It is just common sense. Please remind Steve that were he to live in a Moslem country what he believes or chooses not to believe in this case would subject him to the death penalty.

Steve is a dishonest poster. I've answered all his questions, and he asks the same things over and over. I've refuted him and explained my position to him. I'm not the only one who thinks he is an imbecile. I'm usually pretty good at figuring out who is brain dead.

Bacon, I'm sorry, but you have gotten out of line with him quite a few times.

It seems to me that you've found a defense tactic which includes insulting and degrading those that do not agree with you. Hell, you just admitted it in your last reply.

I'm only on your case about this because I know how you were and I know that deep down, you can't be this much of an asshole. I'm hoping this is just a temporary glitch, internet burnout, outside stress.

Sweetie, you make an exception for me because we have gotten to know each other. You know the cards I've been dealt in life and you know why I so detest hate - that's why you make the exception for me - because you know that my intentions are not bad.

Maybe you can try to understand that people are trying to see the whole ME thing with an open mind - something we are afforded to do within a democracy - NOT everyone is "connected" to the issues and therefore MAY see things differently.

You know this, I don't have to tell you. You also know that you can rationally debate anything thrown at you, like I've seen you do in the past - without passing judgement on people. Shit, if you were like this when I came onto this www - there probably would even be no exception for me.

I also feel that in the past few years that my opinion on the whole Israel/Palestine conflict has changed - not a whole lot, but it has and that has been through the likes of Demo, Catherine, YOU, and Checkmate (he always was my favorite in debate - because of how rational he was). People that NEVER would have changed my view - kanlie, waterman, tax doc, Elric.

Think about it. I really don't think this is you speaking. I hope you are just enjoying some sort of fame - but please keep in mind that you may be fueling something very dangerous.

That's it, sweetie, I'm done lecturing you - there's not much else I can say.

The reason I make an exception for you is because I believe you will do background reading and you are open to learning, and you will address almost every point thrown at you.This is why I have a problem with Steve. He has no substance and cherry picks what he responds to.I have become more of a hardliner of late, I finally got TOTALLY fed up with the Palestinians once they voted for Hamas.I don't buy the Fatah corruption bs. It is obvious that the withdrawal of Gaza under Fatahs leadership meant nothing to the majority of Palestinians. Peace is not on the agenda with them.The cartoon protests pissed me off too, because I weigh that against the lack of protests against terror.So maybe I've changed a tad.

Bacon - a lot of people cherry pick - geez, I wish I could just cherry pick and god only knows that I try to, but I get a little anal about having to respond to every point - I think I'm getting a little better at it though. Not that there is anything wrong with being thurough, but it gets time consuming and their are certainly funner things one could be doing.

You know I'm new here to this little corner of blogging, I don't know how much you and Steve have gotten into it in the past. Mostly, I've seen you two go at it since your post on your support for Israel and if I remember correctly from that post and another post in which you found another blogger to be an anti-semite - you weren't happy with the responses you got in general. I think Steve just kept on you a little more than everyone else.

Since the pals elected Hamas even I have been discouraged - but I don't blame it solely on the Pals. Israel itself made grave mistakes in its refusal to have peace talks with the new moderate government. Israel has motive to not want to come to a negotiated peace settlement. Sorry - but I don't buy this whole - oh those bad palestinians, why can't they just leave us alone. Palis - you need to remember overwhelmingly brought to you a moderate gov after arafat died and Israel didn't play nice. Making demands that are impossible to meet with the resources that were available to Palis was not a good sign to palis. What did you think would happen? Why did Sharon the father of settlements come into power when most Israelis were not for settlements? Cuz he was a hawk and Israelis were sending a message. Ahhhhhhhhh, politics - just blows your mind doesn't it?

Sharon was elected because innocent Jews were being killed, so Israel wanted someone to PROTECT them. Israel was negotiating with Fatah prior to the election.Again, you are spinning from the reality of the situation in order to apologize for the Palestinians. If they were truly desperate and wanted a state, they would never have considered Hamas.56% of Palestinians, the same number who voted for Hamas, still support suicide bombing.If you are in a union and you don't want to strike, but 56% vote for strike, you are SOL. In life, innocent people get affected by majority decisions. That is life.And these people have to live with the consequences at no fault of their own. Except, there is no big voice in Palestinian areas that cry for a peaceful state next to Israel. Steve hardly answers any of my questions, and just attacks my message, not even the facts. He is useless.

It wasn't my intention to "get rid" of him. I'm just very sick of his turning every single post he comments on into another round of "let see how we can frame Aj as a racist".

He clearly doesn't care to know the truth of the I/P situation. He wants reality to bend to his version of it.

That's hardly the basis for fruitful convo.

As for the support of suicide bombing stats:

everyone - read Harris's the End of Faith. These stats - with their evidence - are in the book. He lists some very frightening qutoes from Muslim leaders IN THIS COUNTRY about Jihad etc. He condences all the commandments in the Koran for Muslims to kill infidels down. It takes up SIX pages of unbroken text.

There is a time and place for tolerance, and there is a time and place not to be blinded by it.

Negotiating? No they weren't. Abbas was calling for negotiations the whole time he was in office, Israel was constantly giving press quotes on why they won't negotiate with him.

Yes, exactly - that's why Sharon was elected and it is basically the same concept as to why Hamas was elected. It's a scare tactic and Hamas also offered better solutions to local issues and Palis wanted a change from the corrupt Fatah. Israel should have played with the good guys while it had the chance.

Regardless, Hamas is in power, not much can be done about it now. My guess is that their will be a civil war which will detract from any peace talks. Israel will start pulling out unilaterally and attempt to form it's borders. Nice thing about this scenario is that Israel will have pulled out of most settlements before it realizes that it will have to negotiate a peace settlement in order to have recognized borders. Most of what I have been saying should be done has allready been taking place. I said earlier that it wasn't in Israel's best interest to negotiate, but I wonder if Israel realizes that a negotiated peace would be very difficult with all those people within the occupied territories and is just doing this in order to lessen the blow of the final negotiated deal. Haven't you ever wondered how Israel was going to pull all those people out of those territories without a civil war erupting within Israel? Just a theory. I know that eventually and probably within the next 8 years there will be a Palestinian state with a part of Jerusalem as it's capital. There will be no right of return and yes, terrorist attacks will continue - but nowhere near the amount we are seeing today and with a new, secure, stable generation complete peace will follow.

Then globalization will take place and all hell will break loose again - lol.

LYA - get your terminology straight - they are not commandments - they are verses and OH MY GOD - we've got ourselves another expert at taking things out of context. I'm so glad everyone that visits your blog bacon is as willing to do some research and learning as me. **rolling my eyes**

Oh - one more thing - what about the poll immediately after Arafat died - do you remember what that poll looked like? It was pretty encouraging and the reason it was encouraging was because those poor people had some hope!

200,000 people will not be removed from the the highly populated Jewish settlements. It isn't feasible.I was all for the Gaza withdrawal.Fatah is hardly the good guys. Just a lesser terrorist group that looked like they were up for negotiating.56% of Palis voted Hamas, and 56% still support suicide bombings.Intense negotiations weren't on the table until after the election....if Fatah won.

"LYA - get your terminology straight - they are not commandments - they are verses and OH MY GOD - we've got ourselves another expert at taking things out of context."

Poor, poor Pimpette. How did I take anything out of context? It didn't call them commandments because I think they are comparable to xian biblical commandments. I called them commandments because the statements COMMAND MUSLIMS TO KILL INFIDELS. You'd think as a Muslim yourself you'd be able to grasp that. Now be sure to think carefully about how to effectively lie in your response.

"I'm so glad everyone that visits your blog bacon is as willing to do some research and learning as me. **rolling my eyes** "

This is me rolling my eyes. I know you're probably desperate to defend an indefensible faith, but spare us the drama act. And get to thinking about those lies! they're not going to write themselves!

Lya - would you like to tell me why you just called me a Muslim? Did I say I was a Muslim?

I didn't say that you were another expert at taking things out of context - actually that wasn't clear but I was refering to the person that you had linked to.

Actually - there is not a verse in the Quran that COMMANDS muslims to kill infidels. Most of the verses talk about battles that are about to come within the same period that the Quran is being sent upon to Muhammed. They are actually talking about how they should defend themselves as body armor was being worn in those days and the verses were specific to those incidents.

Now, when you get a little more brain to actually check into these verses and what they mean to the rest of the world, rather than to those paranoid freaks that want to believe that is what it says, then maybe you and I can have a civilized conversation. Until then I will continue pointing out the faults to your pitiful paranoid arguments.

"would you like to tell me why you just called me a Muslim? Did I say I was a Muslim?"

Did I claim to be an expert on anything? No, but that didn't stop you from saying it. You get what you give.

"I didn't say that you were another expert at taking things out of context - actually that wasn't clear but I was refering to the person that you had linked to."

Ah, of course. When all else fails, backpeddal. But good to see you took my advice about planning out your lies.

"Actually - there is not a verse in the Quran that COMMANDS muslims to kill infidels."

To repeat. SIX PAGES of unbroken text in "The End of Faith" show me otherwise. I don't have the book with me today, but I'll bring it to give some examples.

"Now, when you get a little more brain to actually check into these verses and what they mean to the rest of the world, rather than to those paranoid freaks that want to believe that is what it says, then maybe you and I can have a civilized conversation. Until then I will continue pointing out the faults to your pitiful paranoid arguments."

My, my, my aren't you a presumptuous little liar. See, here we are running into the same dishonest bullshit from theists that we see all the time. There are many sects of Islam - and guess what - they don't agree with each other. Some like to kill each other over their different versions of the same goofy religion.

So, perhaps you can explain to me how you have the right to tell me I'm wrong in my assessment of this dumbass religion, when even THEY can't decide what's right? And, given that I have no respect for theists - mainly because of the constant dishonesty you were so good to display for us- why would I trust their interpretations? They've been brainwashed, they've been misled. There testimony is n't reliable. Instead, I'll rely on someone quite a bit more objective and intelligent, then some dishonest internet posters.

If this pathetic display is what you consider "pointing out faults", I just have to point out how you've failed. And if your dishonesty and backpeddaling is any indication of what you consider "civilized conversation", I just have to say no thanks.

"Non-Muslims, according to the Koran, are not considered innocent civilians. They are "guilty" of disbelief (45:31, 83:29) - the worst crime. The Koran says that non-Muslims are against Allah (25:55); on the side of the Satan and are fighting for him (4:76-77); "evil" (16:27, 2:91, 2:99); the "wrong-doers" (2:254, 5:45); the "enemy" and "perverted" (63:4); "wicked" (80:42, 9:125); hypocrites (4:61); "unclean" (9:28). As for whether non-Muslims are civilians, the Koran is not even clear that non-Muslims are fully human. Instead, the disbelievers are the "worst of created beings" (98:6); "miscreants" (2:99, 24:55); "the worst beasts in Allah's sight" (8:55), "apes" and/or "pigs" (2:65-66, 5:58-60, 7:166), and so on. Verse 60:4 says followers of Allah will hate the disbelievers forever, unless the disbelievers come to believe in Allah only. Think about this thorough demonization of disbelievers, together with the conception of disbelief as the worst possible crime. Now think about how easy it would be for a Koran-believing Muslim to find a non-Muslim guilty of corruption on earth or war against God. Keep in mind that much of the words, deeds, and customs of the non-Muslims happen to go against Islam.

Killing disbelievers is not, in itself, a crime[2]. This is confirmed in Tabari, e.g., "Killing disbelievers is a small matter to us..." Tabari IX:69.

--In fact, many verses in the Koran order the killing of various kinds of disbelievers (33:61, 4:76, 4:89-91, 8:12, 9:41, 9:5, 9:29, 61:11, etc.).--

Believers must honour their duty to Allah and fight the disbelievers in battle, or be punished in hell (2:216, 8:15-16, 9:39). Although the Koran explicitly forbids the murder of Muslims (4:93), the Koran does not contain a similar statement that forbids the killing or murder of non-Muslims. Where there are benefits to Islam in letting the non-Muslims live, there could be some minimal protections for the non-Muslims[2]. They could be spared as slaves to be bought or sold; they could become dhimmis (subjugated second-class citizens); they could be ransomed; women captives could be taken forcibly as wives or sex slaves; or captives could be set free depending on the personal discretion of the Muslim captor. Abul Kasem has cited and discussed Ibn Kathir's interpretation of 5:32, indicating that non-Muslims are not protected by 5:32; only Muslims are protected. http://www.faithfreedom.org/oped/AbulKasem50808.htm. "

Bacon - no. I have no time nor the patience for it. If you would put half the time into researching it for yourself as you do bashing the religion, you would know the answers. You should invest into a Quran with intros and footnotes and look into it the proper way.

Lya:

"LYA - get your terminology straight - they are not commandments - they are verses and OH MY GOD - we've got ourselves another expert at taking things out of context. I'm so glad everyone that visits your blog bacon is as willing to do some research and learning as me."

Did you write the blog that you posted the link to? It was my understanding that the blog was written by someone else, but since you insist that I called you the expert at taking things out of context, fine so be it - you authored the blog in question. So, yes, in that case, it makes you "another expert in taking things out of context" as well as **heavy sarcasm** "one of those people that bothers to do research".

Congrats!

You can quote out of context all you want - it doesn't mean anything. How about actually looking up the verses in an authorized Quran, reading the introductions and the footnotes - oh, geez, I'm asking too much aren't I?

And again, when you manage to find your brain - let me know and we'll have an intelligent conversation.

To repeat because apparently she's too intoxicated by her own arrogance to read a damn thing:

"See, here we are running into the same dishonest bullshit from theists that we see all the time. There are many sects of Islam - and guess what - they don't agree with each other. Some like to kill each other over their different versions of the same goofy religion.

So, perhaps you can explain to me how you have the right to tell me I'm wrong in my assessment of this dumbass religion, when even THEY can't decide what's right? And, given that I have no respect for theists - mainly because of the constant dishonesty you were so good to display for us- why would I trust their interpretations? They've been brainwashed, they've been misled. There testimony is n't reliable. Instead, I'll rely on someone quite a bit more objective and intelligent, then some dishonest internet posters. "

"Not all the Muslims are terrorists. That is because not all of them are true Muslims. But as long as they remain Muslims, they are in danger of becoming terrorists. Muslims hate mankind to the degree that they love Muhammad. This is an undeniable fact that can be readily observed by anyone."

Sounds a bit Hitlerish to me, but if you feel the site has a point, that's your right.

BEAJ:I think maybe you need to do some research next time.I did some digging around on this post, & apparently, according to this:www.centerforatheism.org/newslettersThe Aug. 4 2005 specifically says,"We wish to confirm and underscore this fact. Darby has not served in that capacity as a Director for over two years. Many of his activities and statements, especially concerning the Holocaust as well as how he conducts himself regarding Atheist, Freethought, Humanist or nonbeliever groups and individuals, do not in any way reflect the official position of American Atheists or its officers."

So your commentary is seriously 3 years outta date.

As to this:I feel American Atheists and their No God Blog has an overwhelming anti-Israel bias there. That simply isn't so.That's the fallacy of the unrepresented example, BTW. Do me a favor, & google 'spotlight, nogodblog', or 'chad hetman',nogodblog'.Or maybe you should email David Silveman, an atheist Jew, & maybe just ask him about it.

Thanks RA. I will post an update. I did a search at the no god blog and couldn't find anything, so I was waiting to see if I was wrong. I was almost convinced I wasn't because nobody up until now said something.

BEAJ:But I figure someone would say something.Well, silence doesn't always signify assent.I rarely come here. NGB is my usual hangout.Some of the regulars here post on the No God Blog.The only person I've seen thus far has been Lya, & I don't think she goes there much anymore (but I can't speak for her, so I don't know for sure).But I'm glad someone came to their defense finally.Well, honestly, I've been at the NGB for about a year now. & I've seen a lot go on there. Anti-zionists actually do receive short shrift from the majority. Anti-semites have been wailed on. & for the record, I'm now 1/2 way afraid to criticize Israel in any way. Lest I be labelled anti-semite.Nice going.

RA, most people who criticize Israel are anti-semites first. You rarely see these dudes also criticize Saudi Arabia, the Darfur situation, etc, with the same vigor. No country is perfect and no country was formed with 100% native approval. But Israel seems to get way more attention than any other conflict on this planet, and most of it is based on bad information. That being said, I've criticized Israel previously and the settlers on this blog btw.

"I'm not going to chase down every verse and explain to you how they are taken out of context."

yeah, there's a surprise.

"It's much easier to discredit you with the links you are providing here that contain the following:

"compliments of faithfreedom:"

So you whining that we're taking things out of context you go and do the exact same thing? Well we can now add hypocrite to your list of attributes.

"You've associated yourself with a hate site and that's all I need. Thanks for making it so easy, dear."

Dear? Spare me the false muslim love, k? is this the best you can do? You didn't and apparently CAN'T produce a single link that proves me wrong. All you've got is your saying I'm wrong and some whining assertion that because what you read you don't like, therefore it must be racist. This is the saddest, most pitiful attempt at deabte from a theist I've ever seen.

"Oh, one more thing sweetie, again, when did I say that Islam was my religion? "

Again with the bullshit friendliness. Why are theists so dishonest? Your pitiful, cowardly defense of it makes it clear enough.

Lya - I don't have to do anything of the such. Any intelligent poster can deduce what is going on at faithfreedom. I gave a link to the whole article, there is nothing out of context. Faithfreedom is a self-admitted hate site and believes that there is nothing wrong with it.

An intelligent poster with interest in what it is that we are talking about will take the time to actually further study it - that's what makes them "intelligent". So, I realize that this is something that you lack and for your dumbass:

They have been intentionally misused by some Muslims and non-Muslims alike to advance wholly political agendas, with total disregard for accompanying teachings that overwhelmingly condemn self-aggrandizing militarism and offensive war-mongering.

The Qur'an repeatedly emphasizes that defensive war -- fighting to protect oneself against invading enemies -- is the only kind of combat sanctioned (2:190 - 191). In numerous other examples, it teaches that the use of force should be a last resort (2:192, 4:90); that normal relations between peoples, nations and states, whether Muslim or not, should be peaceful (49:13); that necessary wars must be limited in time and space (2:190); that maximum effort must be applied at all times to advance the cause of peace (10:25); that whatever means are undertaken to work for peace during a conflict (such as mediation and arbitration) must be attempted over and over again until resolution is achieved (8:61); that freedom of religion must be granted to every one (2:256), and so on.

As with any Holy Book, every verse of the Qur'an must be read and interpreted within its own context and against the background of the Qur'an as a whole.

For example, those Quranic verses which condone Muslims fighting non-Muslims (9:5, 29 and 36), are not directed against the non-Muslims for being outside the faith, but because those non-Muslims were aggressors and/or transgressors. But if taken alone, and interpreted in isolation, such verses could lead one to believe that the Qur'an advocates war-like relations between Muslims and non-Muslims until the latter surrender or convert. So widespread are such de-contextualized assumptions that one Qur'an verse (9:5) was mislabelled "the Sword Verse."

When viewed against more than 100 other parallel Quranic verses, such extreme interpretations of these verses invalidate their own logic. For example, one of the most fundamental Quranic teachings is, "There shall be no coercion in matters of faith" (2:256), which lays down categorically that any attempt at the forcible conversion of unbelievers is prohibited and condemned. This precludes any legitimate possibility of true Muslims demanding or expecting that a defeated enemy should embrace Islam as the price for immunity or mercy.

http://www.mediamonitors.net/elmasry31.html

Next, how would it be appropriate to call me a racist? What race am I against?

I have stated in my blog allready that I believe in god. I've made those comments all over other people's blogs. I haven't lied about anything. You chose to make me a "muslim" because this makes you feel better for some reason. Only god and you know the reason why.

Lya - what holy scriptures have you read? The Torah? The Bible? The Quran? Or do you just like reading the cliff notes?

The Comment Pimpette:Wow.They have been intentionally misused by some Muslims and non-Muslims alike to advance wholly political agendas, with total disregard for accompanying teachings that overwhelmingly condemn self-aggrandizing militarism and offensive war-mongering.Yep. Same thing's been done w/almost every religious text in history.I came to the same conclusions after reading the Qu'ran verses you've quoted.& I'm an atheist.I've done some research into the other side, & found that what I've been told is not quite what's there in black & white.We also tend to forget that the muslim faith has had some positive sides to it. The Medinaists. The Sufis. The Baha'i.Religion tends to reflect humanity, in both its perversity, as well as its benignness. Unfortunately, it leans more towards the former.

BEAJ:A, most people who criticize Israel are anti-semites first.I dunno. I tend to criticize Israel, but I don't really hate anyone. You rarely see these dudes also criticize Saudi Arabia, the Darfur situation, etc, with the same vigor.I'll have to take your word for that. No country is perfect and no country was formed with 100% native approval. You say that so often, it's starting to lose its punch.But Israel seems to get way more attention than any other conflict on this planet, and most of it is based on bad information.There's a lot of reasons for that.As the major democracy in that part of the world, it's gonna get eyeballed a lot. As for bad info, well, who do I trust? Nothing personal, but you seem to have a distinct bias. & before you start throwing down, forbear, please:You seem to infer that everyone would be better off if the Palis were extinquished. Your recent 'Poll' evinces a distasteful (at least to me) bias. You've stated, as memory serves, that 'If you're pro-humanity, you can't be pro-Palistinean'.& honestly: have you been over there? In the ME? Do you even KNOW any Palis? While I am in no way anti-Israel (I think the whole argument about 'existence' is a moot point either way: they're there, they exist, it's a stupid talking point), in no way am I anti-Arab either.I'd rather examine the facts & make my own conclusions, rather than taking any 1 person's word for it.That being said, I've criticized Israel previously and the settlers on this blog btw.I'm fairly unfamiliar w/your blog: I'll poke about, & see.Thanks, BTW, for your update to the post.

RA, I said MOST people who criticize Israel, not all people.You don't have to take my word for the fact that Israel is criticized and other countries are not. It is a fact and easily proved if you have the time.Facts are facts, I only have so many answers for so many questions, so at least I'm being consistent at the risk of making a statement that loses its punch over time.I've never been to Israel, but I'm very familiar with the situation. I have never got into a heated discussion with a live Palestinian though. But I've seen enough interviewed, and I have their own words on some of my multimedia here on my blog. I don't doubt I have a bias, but I also have a bias against those who believe in a young earth. I have done loads of research on this subject, and I used to think there was hope. I am not for genocide, but I am being honest that the Palestinians contribute nothing to humanity and their only goal is to destroy Israel.Do a blog search for "Amona" with my blog to see some criticism. The poll is sort of tongue in cheek but it reflects the fact that I have no respect for the Palestinians anymore....especially after the Hamas vote.

And I am always open to new facts and information being the Atheist that I am.

Hey, I wanna pile on here. Don't knock Alabama! Trust me, a jackass like that, atheist, Bible-banging, or whatever, wouldn't get elected in this state. We don't elect racist white trash here. Maybe in some podunk town he might get elected dog-catcher, but not this, no way.;-)

No religion is perfect and the behaviour of many Muslim people is far from perfect - you just can't have a blind hate towards a group of people and on top of it lie in order to promote that hate. That statement goes to both some Muslims and people like Lya that are clueless as to how similar they are to those that they hate.

By "intelligent" you mean who ever comes to the same conclusion as you.

"An intelligent poster with interest in what it is that we are talking about will take the time to actually further study it - that's what makes them "intelligent"."

And what makes you dishonest. It's clear you feel only the people who agree with you are intelligent.

So, I realize that this is something that you lack and for your dumbass:"

*lol* I see god's love has touched you.

"They have been intentionally misused by some Muslims and non-Muslims alike to advance wholly political agendas, with total disregard for accompanying teachings that overwhelmingly condemn self-aggrandizing militarism and offensive war-mongering."

That's the very definition of religion. And, it also misses the point. These versus exist in the Koran. Since I have pointed out TWICE now that no two sects agree, you don't get to say they are misused. They can't agree on how to go about their religion, so you don't get to tell me I'm wrong about it. Clearly, there isn't a solid base to start from.

"The Qur'an repeatedly emphasizes"

Finally! Some content! But, see above answer. This is your intepretation. No more and no less valid than theirs.

"As with any Holy Book, every verse of the Qur'an must be read and interpreted within its own context and against the background of the Qur'an as a whole."

So, this so-called all-powerful god couldn't get his act together enough to make it plain and clear what he wants - if anything at all - and leaves it to his admittedly falliable and flawed creations to have at it over it, and *I'm* a dumbass? Once again, since religious texts are open to interpretation, what makes you verison any more right than others? SINCE YOU COLLECTIVELY CAN'T AGREE ON THE FINER POINTS HOW CAN YOU TELL ANYONE THAT THEY ARE WRONG ABOUT IT?

"For example, those Quranic verses which condone Muslims fighting non-Muslims (9:5, 29 and 36), are not directed against the non-Muslims for being outside the faith, but because those non-Muslims were aggressors and/or transgressors. But if taken alone, and interpreted in isolation, such verses could lead one to believe that the Qur'an advocates war-like relations between Muslims and non-Muslims until the latter surrender or convert. So widespread are such de-contextualized assumptions that one Qur'an verse (9:5) was mislabelled "the Sword Verse."

Right. And, this happens in every religion. And, I will say to this what I have said a million times already: see above answer.

"Next, how would it be appropriate to call me a racist? What race am I against?"

I looked back over the thread and don't see where I called you a racist. What are you referring to?

"I have stated in my blog allready that I believe in god."

Never visited your blog. Though AJ did give me the link.

"I haven't lied about anything."

Except about being Muslim. See next quote:

"You chose to make me a "muslim" because this makes you feel better for some reason. Only god and you know the reason why."

Why do choose to hide the fact that you are a Muslim? Steve - the ever-present strawman king - defends the people. YOU defend the religion. Anyone with this much invested in defending the religion, is or was a Muslim - by sheer probability alone. It's interesting - if not a little tragic - that you hide it. And badly, at that.

"What holy scriptures have you read? The Torah? The Bible? The Quran? Or do you just like reading the cliff notes?"

Oh good, more dishonest, presumptuous barbs. I studied Judaism and Christianity for a total of seven years with their respective holymen. I was once a believer. Born xian - I studied it. Later, intending on converting to Judaism, I studied that. I lived in Israel for a short time. During that stay, I worked with an interfaith org trying to bridge the gap between Palestinians and Israelis. I have visited the refugee camps. (I have been to Jordan as well).

To paraphrase Aj's comment: simply because you don't like the answer and the messanger, doesn't make it wrong. Simply because you don't like what I say about Islam, doesn't mean I don't know anything about it.

"No religion is perfect and the behaviour of many Muslim people is far from perfect - you just can't have a blind hate towards a group of people and on top of it lie in order to promote that hate."

And, apparently, simply pointing out the fact that they are not perfect and th source of where the violence even might stem from, makes one a racist.

"That statement goes to both some Muslims and people like Lya that are clueless as to how similar they are to those that they hate."

More presumptuous lies. Does your constant dishonest every make you sleepy? You're assuming I have no experience with Islam. This is incorrect, but don't let that stop your lying.

"It is so unfortunate how fear and ignorance breed hate. "

And how arrogance and an inability to pull one's head out of one's ass makes one lie and assume, instead of learn.

Lya - yes, I attack your intelligence as the first (at least memorable) communication between you and I you call me a muslim and insinuate that I will lie:

"You'd think as a Muslim yourself you'd be able to grasp that. Now be sure to think carefully about how to effectively lie in your response. "

"This is me rolling my eyes. I know you're probably desperate to defend an indefensible faith, but spare us the drama act. And get to thinking about those lies! they're not going to write themselves!"

Now - that was you going on the attack FIRST and you better damn well KNOW that I'm not a lightweight at this game - you wanna dish it out - then know that I'll make you eat it up and lick that plate clean.

Have you noticed that Bacon and I are able to have CIVILIZED conversations in regards to our differences?

You talk about the different sects of Islam and how they all have different interpretations of the Quran, but the point is that they all read the VERY SAME Quran - that doesn't change amongst the major sects. The differences amongst the sects are more political than theological and the theological is different within the hadiths and sunna.

ahhhhhhhhh, finally, some logical debate from a simple mind:

"So, this so-called all-powerful god couldn't get his act together enough to make it plain and clear what he wants - if anything at all - and leaves it to his admittedly falliable and flawed creations to have at it over it, and *I'm* a dumbass? Once again, since religious texts are open to interpretation, what makes you verison any more right than others? SINCE YOU COLLECTIVELY CAN'T AGREE ON THE FINER POINTS HOW CAN YOU TELL ANYONE THAT THEY ARE WRONG ABOUT IT?"

How many so called "Catholics" "Lutherans" "Jews" "Christians" "Muslims" have ACTUALLY read their own scriptures? Saddly not many. It's pretty simple, it's there - all of the peace loving that you so want to not be there, but its PEOPLE have to read it, otherwise they are subject to POLITICAL agendas of others which turn into MOVEMENTS and IDEOLIGIES - link: http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/islam/blis_extremists.htm . Now, if you take a look, there is a basic theme running throughout all of these movements and ideologies and that is that these movements could play on people's suffering - mostly economic and occasionally other oppressions.

My argument is that you can NEVER eliminate religion and I've seen way too much calling for the ellimination of this particular religion, so I do find myself defending it. What needs to be done is a major reform upon religion not an extermination of it.

Now, Lya -

This is from your original post which sparked a comment from silly little me:

"As for the support of suicide bombing stats:

everyone - read Harris's the End of Faith. These stats - with their evidence - are in the book. He lists some very frightening qutoes from Muslim leaders IN THIS COUNTRY about Jihad etc. He condences all the commandments in the Koran for Muslims to kill infidels down. It takes up SIX pages of unbroken text.

There is a time and place for tolerance, and there is a time and place not to be blinded by it.

We are fast approaching the latter."

I will not sit here and let bullshit like this go - I can not STAND people pushing misinformation and I'm sorry, but I expected a little more from an atheist. You can take religion out of the whole I/P conflict - you're still going to have a conflict - I can gaurantee you that and considering Palis are a people without an army or arms - you can bet that they most likely would have resorted to suicide bombings even without the Quran (which by the way, suicide is explicitly against the religion - it's one of their commandments - thou shalt not kill thy self - LMAO.

You didn't call me a racist, I looked back over the thread and I tend to speed read through long posts and will misread things on occasion - I apologize.

""I haven't lied about anything."

Except about being Muslim. See next quote:

"You chose to make me a "muslim" because this makes you feel better for some reason. Only god and you know the reason why."

Why do choose to hide the fact that you are a Muslim? Steve - the ever-present strawman king - defends the people. YOU defend the religion. Anyone with this much invested in defending the religion, is or was a Muslim - by sheer probability alone. It's interesting - if not a little tragic - that you hide it. And badly, at that."

So, now you are not only unintelligent but not even trying to be very good at lying - you've got a lot to learn from me ;-) Okay, a couple of posts back you said:

""would you like to tell me why you just called me a Muslim? Did I say I was a Muslim?"

Did I claim to be an expert on anything? No, but that didn't stop you from saying it. You get what you give."

AND

you called me a Muslim in your first reply to me in which I corrected you in regards to what you stated were commandments. I really wasn't that all up in your face for you to get all that defensive about it, hon.

WOW - Lya - It took you SEVEN years of studies and you nearly CONVERTED to Judaism before you had this sudden need to become an atheist and you are all over MY case for being a foolish theist?

Damn girl! Talk about hypocricy!

I do admit that I find it interesting and would like to know how you went from all of that to being an atheist - purely curious - will go check out your blog later to see if you have written about it.

You didn't simply point out the fact that they are not perfect and the source of where the violence may stem from - you took a very underhanded approach at trying to explain it - you promoted taking things out of context and in my opinion you propogate hate. Similar things were done prior to Hitler taking power and gaining allegiance by the German population.

""That statement goes to both some Muslims and people like Lya that are clueless as to how similar they are to those that they hate."

More presumptuous lies. Does your constant dishonest every make you sleepy? You're assuming I have no experience with Islam. This is incorrect, but don't let that stop your lying"

It was an editorial - that's how I percieve you - I wasn't lying about that. You sure do like to throw the word liar around Lya.

What was your first impression of the Quran and do you know what version you read?

Hdoff? I don't get it.I think Lya makes excellent points and having read her story about how she almost became a Jew on her blog gives me good background on where she is coming from.I think she is much more knowledgable then you, and even me, when it comes to Israel.She is extremely intelligent and you aren't winning too many points calling her stupid, especially if others are reading this.I suggest you go to her blog and look up her 3 posts on how she became an Atheist before you go any further slamming her.

She just may be more knowledgeable than you or I on the topic of Israel, I really don't know yet. It's possible. That doesn't make her right in this case - which doesn't have to do with Israel anymore.

As for my attacking her intelligence - I don't know that intelligence is debatable, but she isn't helping any by allowing me to do it - go read what my profile says.

Are you sure I'm not winning any points? I think you outta poll it - lol. You know me better than that, sweetie! When did I give a shit if I was winning points?